Mad science and secret codes in the TV series Fringe

Ars obsesses over a variety of geek puzzles embedded into the new Fox TV …

Bad Robot, the production company behind the Fox TV series Fringe, is no stranger to involving audiences in Easter egg hunts. Lost, their best known series, is peppered with them. Untold numbers of websites are dedicated to tracking these visual clues, which on Lost range from the mysterious sequence of numbers (4, 8, 15, 16, 23, and 42) to Egyptian hieroglyphs to shark fins tattooed with the Dharma logo. If Lost set the standard, Fringe has picked up the challenge and run. The producers readily admit they have created any number of challenges and embedded them into each episode.

Fringe, which airs on Tuesday nights directly after American Idol, is the story of a mad scientist, his son, and a young FBI agent. Each week the trio explores a new case of what they call "Fringe Science," which is what normal people call "entertaining malarkey".

Fringe makes little or no attempt to stay within the bounds of what is real or possible. The second episode featured a "magic old man baby" that was born, aged, and died as an elderly person within the space of a few hours. In that episode's wake, retired science teachers around the world spontaneously experienced nervous breakdowns, muttering feverishly about the conservation of mass and the temporal limits of cell mitosis.

That's not to say the show is not worth watching. It is. But leave any expectations about proper science behind. Go in expecting what one IO9.com poster called "Mad Science." This mad science is performed by a proper mad scientist, who has been ruled clinically insane and whose son is his guardian. You'll be entertained by the action and adventure and by the touching relationship between the father/son team. The female lead, playing the young and eager FBI agent, is best described by Digital Spy poster LostFool, who compared her to Ikea furniture: functional, nice enough to look at, but a bit wooden.

The games

The puzzle component of Fringe is something that the show's creators have described as optional extras. You can watch the show, enjoy the story, and move on. Or you can stick around and accept their invitation to play. This engagement strategy has been a huge success for Lost and is just starting to gain an audience and awareness for Fringe.

Unlike Lost, where clues come and go almost randomly, Fringe games are part of each and every episode. You can watch the show and know that you can participate in any of several games. These include:

Where's Baldo. The mysterious (and hairless) character of "The Observer" was properly introduced to audiences in Episode 4, "The Arrival." He has appeared, however, in every single episode made. Spotting him, whether in a window reflection on a train or standing by a tree behind the main action, offers a sense of real accomplishment. Viewers have complained that he appears to be photoshopped into a few of his appearances, such as on the soccer field of Episode 13. When playing "Where's Baldo," it helps to record the episode in high definition. Some of his "appearances," with his 1950's style fashion, his fedora, and his briefcase have been quite small in a screen-size sense.

The mysterious "observer" appears in each Fringe episode.

Spot the "Next Episode" clue. Hidden in each episode is a clue to some detail in the next episode. In the pilot, that clue was a rebus on a newspaper stand of a pen plus a rose. The next episode featured a character called Penrose. Episode 8 showcased a little butterfly; monarch butterflies played a pivotal role in the plot of Episode 9. Admittedly, these clues are better recognized than guessed at. It's easier to go back and find the clue after each succeeding episode has already aired than to figure out which of the many visual details in the episode hints at what's to come.

Analyze the rectangular pattern. Scattered throughout every episode are patterns of, well, rectangles. As you can see here, they are always laid out in grids--most often on buildings but sometimes on walls or on tables. The patterns are obviously intentional as some light intensities vary between adjacent windows.

Grid pattern images appear in each Fringe episode.

Highlight the repeating motifs. Scattered through each episode are little visual tweaks. Posters for Massive Dynamics products, the fictional company that lies near the heart of the show's conspiracies can often be found on walls and billboards in the background. Also recurring are patterns of "green green green red," a light sequence that was central to episode 8, but which has appeared on binocular readouts and on knit hats as well. Several viewers have spotted repeated "He's not dead" messages, apparently referring to FBI Agent Dunham's "was he or was he not a traitor" boyfriend, on grave stones and in stairwells. Website FringeTelevision.com offers the most comprehensive watch for these visual motifs.

And these are not the only extracurricular games available. Viewers regularly enjoy guessing which food mad scientist Walter Bishop will be craving each week. Apparently a viewer request for cheese steak inspired the craving that showed up in episode 11, "Bound." The episode's associated "Walter's Lab Notes" release from Fox also featured the iconic Philadelphia treat. (The show is set, incidentally, in Boston.)

Bishop's constant struggles with lab assistant Astrid's name ("astro" and "asteroid" were two near misses) has also led to some predictions, although the series writers seem to have abandoned the name game in recent episodes. Other games include "spot the accidental Aussie accent" (two of the three leads hail from Australia) and "find the hidden Lost/Alias/etc. references," which abound. The biggest mystery however remains rooted in the images that appear before most commercial breaks.

Are you factoring in the fact that whenever Obama feels like he needs to speak on a Monday Night this pushes the next House episode back to the next week, and they show this shitty show instead of House? Seriously, shit like this just pissing off people who actually want to watch a show that will be remembered in the future and not put on just DVDs and BluRay for future clueless consumers to throw their money away on.

As a passive science aficionado, I find, with a proper suspension of belief that "Fringe" is quite the watch. True it is, in actuality, not cogent with our perceptions or rules; but is consistent within it's continuum. This. I find is a desirable trait within fantasy, even if it does lead those who know no better to a desire for knowledge, no matter how incorrect.

A proper mind, no matter how far astray will recognize that truth is self validating, and with enough provocation, will finally understand the ideal, the essence per-se, to explore any truth behind the fiction... no matter how self validating this program is, and be engaged in a persuit of a more sublime truth.

Wow... I think your giving them waaay to much credit with your analysis. It reminds me more of numerology than actual science. (And it's probably more along the lines of what the script writers are capable of.)

I watched the pilot and haven't watched it since. The plot seemed like a re-make of X Files (without the witty banter) and more obvious "plot twists".

What made me abandon it was when Mr Super Scientist uttered the words: "It's a simple if-then equation..." (followed by some other gibberish). If Mr Smartypants was actually a scientist he'd know that 1) it was a useless statement (kind of a tautology IIRC) and 2) "if then" is NOT A FUCKING EQUATION. (It's a conditional, logical implication or if you want to be more vague a logic statement.)

Stuff like that reeks of lazy writing and it's added because they (script writers) needed to add some "sciency sounding stuff" but where too uninterested to ask someone with some actual talent for something good to write. Furthermore I find it insulting to the intended audience that they (the writers) assume that anyone watching is too stupid to understand it's wrong.

Basically, if they don't understand that a conditional isn't the same thing as an equation I'm going to assume that they also lack the ability to make interesting logic puzzles. From all talk about Lost I've mostly had the feeling that they make shit up as they go along and hope they can get the ends meet at the finale episode. It all reeks of Deus Ex Machina, or a bad detective story, where they in the end say that "oh, all that stuff was just for laughs. these were the real clues".

The plot itself, while silly and derivative, wasn't too bad. But considering that shows like Futurama or even "The big bang theory" (a low budget sitcom) get science speak right makes it apparent that it can be done.

It also makes it apparent that someone like JJ Abrams doesn't have the ability or inclination to do so.

Wow... I think your giving them waaay to much credit with your analysis. It reminds me more of numerology than actual science. (And it's probably more along the lines of what the script writers are capable of.)

I think it very likely that they add in something with no obvious meaning so that years later they can say, "See how smart we are? No-one has figured it out yet!" Of course not, it was random gibberish!

If you want proof, look at Lost. So many "puzzles" were introduced and then subsequently forgotten. The map on one of the interior doors of the Hatch was worth exploring, but instead they blew it up and never spoke of it again. Just one of dozens (hundreds?) of things lost along the way.

Are you factoring in the fact that whenever Obama feels like he needs to speak on a Monday Night this pushes the next House episode back to the next week, and they show this shitty show instead of House?

Seriously? House is so similar from week to week that I'm not sure anyone needs to see it with any frequency. It's nice to watch occasionally, but I can't imagine how one can sit through the exact same thing every week.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who watched the pilot, thought it was terrible, and vowed never to watch it again.People are ignorant enough about science without stupid shows like this filling people's heads with nonsense about conspiracies, aliens, monsters and other rubbish.

The show is awful, imo, and I didn't just watch the pilot and leave it at that I watched three episodes in and the nonsensical script, bgus science and hackneyed explanations made the show unbearable, I started watching something else. It was all too much for me. However, I should have expected as much when I saw that the writers for the Transfomer movie were involved. That movie had the same issues that this show has.

I usually like JJ Abrams stuff, I think when he's truly involved in a porjet it shines, but when he leaves stuff up to his henchmen they can't seem to keep things in-order. Alias was amazing for the first two season, then it got kind of weird. The same goes for Lost, The first season was amazing, the first half of the second season was also amazing, past that the show has devolved into a nonsensical can of worms, where they throw everything at the user and hopes ine sticks. JJ hasn't been heavily involved in the show since the second season, since he was doign MI3 at the time. He handed the reins off to Lindelof(or whatever his name is) and that guy proceeded to crap all over a great thing.

My whole thing is that if Abrams isn't interested in actually making the science and plot at least plausible in his shows, what the hell is he going to do with Star Trek? Trust me if the science doesn't some across well in a Star Trek movie, the trekkies will probably beat him with a tricorder.

(Fortunately, I have matured enough that I can now distinguish the difference between 'the real world' and 'fiction'; I find this makes it so much easier to enjoy entertainment. And now I can watch things other than documentaries! It's amazing, like a whole new world...)

In the pilot, that clue was a rebus on a newspaper stand of a pen plus a rose. The next episode featured a character called Penrose.

These "puzzles" are just aggravating. They are not smart or clever, because there is absolutely no logic to seeing a pen and a rose and concluding the next episode must have a character called Penrose!They remind of the stupid "clues" revealed at the end of the show "The Mole" where they reveal something totally asinine like in episode 4 the number 72 was visible in the background and the mole was born in 1972! That's not a clue!

It's not a, "good" show really. But some of the characters can be entertaining.

Those whining about bad science are best served to not watch. It's never once tried to be a science show, it's pure science fiction. It's X-Files without even pretending that there could be a logical explanation for anything (and less talented writers.)

Are you factoring in the fact that whenever Obama feels like he needs to speak on a Monday Night this pushes the next House episode back to the next week, and they show this shitty show instead of House?

Seriously? House is so similar from week to week that I'm not sure anyone needs to see it with any frequency. It's nice to watch occasionally, but I can't imagine how one can sit through the exact same thing every week.

on top of the fact that this complaint doesn't even make sense. house airs on mondays and fringe on tuesdays. i can't imagine why they would move fringe forcibly to another day just to preempt house and I'm pretty sure they haven't.

anyway, I think you people who are physically angered by a show you don't like need to take a step back and do some deep breathing or something. good god.

I like fringe. it's mindless enough to be a sort of junk fiction but "smart" enough to remain slightly intriguing and keep my attention. I'll keep watching. hell, I'll keep watching just to make all the angry people in here pop an aneurysm since the thought of anyone actually enjoying this show is clearly bad for their blood pressure.

Huh. I love the show. I had no idea that people would be so polarized about it.

I don't care if the "science" doesn't exist. It is science fiction (look it up ). And frankly, there aren't enough science fiction shows on TV for me.

The characters are interesting. Josh Jackson's character is genuinely funny, as is the bizarre relationship between him and his father on the show.

What I don't get is all of the people who posted that they watched one episode and so the entire show sucks. The main characters all met in the first episode, so they didn't actually know each other, and acted accordingly. As they have gotten to know each other, the show has gotten progressively better.

The only episode that really compelled me was the introduction of the observer, along with the videogame-esque action hero, and the probe that melts its way through the planet. Viewing all those elements as part of a 'videogame' taking place in the real world, presented a creepy vision of how AI's might manifest themselves in reality.

But other than that, I find this show unwatchable. The dialogue sucks, and two of the three main characters are insufferably whiny.

It could have been an awesome blend of the Outer Limits and X-Files, instead its nowhere at all.

Originally posted by Mark C. Roduner, Jr.:As a passive science aficionado, I find, with a proper suspension of belief that "Fringe" is quite the watch. True it is, in actuality, not cogent with our perceptions or rules; but is consistent within it's continuum. This. I find is a desirable trait within fantasy, even if it does lead those who know no better to a desire for knowledge, no matter how incorrect.

A proper mind, no matter how far astray will recognize that truth is self validating, and with enough provocation, will finally understand the ideal, the essence per-se, to explore any truth behind the fiction... no matter how self validating this program is, and be engaged in a persuit of a more sublime truth.

</longwinded>

is

quote:

Originally posted by DarkOwl:...pretentious self-indulgent masturbation at its worst, in my opinion.

i agree.

btw. the show is decent as mainstream tv science fiction will get. but its poor acting and writing. even the clues and puzzles are weak.

I quite like this show, and I'm always fascinated by shows that reward the attentive long-time viewers with both intrinsic (story, characters) and additional ("clues", "mythology") value.

That said, I think it is evident the writers don't take themselves (and the "science") too serious and hope the audience to do the same. In Episode 4 IIRC they used homing pigeons to track a person by tuning them to the person's (anomaly-ish) magnetic field. When the pigeons were released, the following dialogue took place:

I'll admit, I like the show. Its ok that the science isnt realistic, it is fiction after all. What I find funny is that everyone here is busy lambasting the science of the show. Yet, history shows us that fiction sets the direction for science. Just look at star trek. When the original series came out, most of that technology was fictional garbage too. Yet all these years later, scientists have actually built hand held communicators (cell phones) and tricorders (pdas). Now some things in the show will always be impossible, but its important to have an open mind.

Originally posted by TechGeek:I'll admit, I like the show. Its ok that the science isnt realistic, it is fiction after all. What I find funny is that everyone here is busy lambasting the science of the show. Yet, history shows us that fiction sets the direction for science. Just look at star trek. When the original series came out, most of that technology was fictional garbage too. Yet all these years later, scientists have actually built hand held communicators (cell phones) and tricorders (pdas). Now some things in the show will always be impossible, but its important to have an open mind.

The important difference here is that Star Trek was set in the future.

Originally posted by TechGeek:I'll admit, I like the show. Its ok that the science isnt realistic, it is fiction after all. What I find funny is that everyone here is busy lambasting the science of the show. Yet, history shows us that fiction sets the direction for science. Just look at star trek. When the original series came out, most of that technology was fictional garbage too. Yet all these years later, scientists have actually built hand held communicators (cell phones) and tricorders (pdas). Now some things in the show will always be impossible, but its important to have an open mind.

When your PDA can diagnose cancer in 2 seconds, then maybe you have a tricorder.

Come to think of it, doctors are using iPhones to read MRIs now. We're not that far off.

But I tend to prefer hard science fiction to flaky. Charles Stross, Iain M. Banks, writers like that who actually consider science in their writing. It's also some of the best philosophical writing going on as well when it comes to envisioning the future.

Although I have to stop short of the convergence so many assume is coming. Putting my brain in a machine means, at best, a copy of me goes on "living" while I – in any ontological sense – cease to exist in spite of my xeroxed supplemental self whooping it up and checking out the digital chicks.

I watched the first two episodes (or maybe 3, I can't remember) mainly because I figured that with any new show, perhaps the characters hadn't fully developed. It was the wrong approach - this show is utter crap. Even with Stewart Denethor as a main character.

As far as the article is concerned, I laughed at the first few "hints" given for something in the next episode. A butterfly in one episode is related to butterflies in the next episode - holy shit, stop the presses, this is a clear sign of an intelligent show!!!

Are you factoring in the fact that whenever Obama feels like he needs to speak on a Monday Night this pushes the next House episode back to the next week, and they show this shitty show instead of House?

Seriously? House is so similar from week to week that I'm not sure anyone needs to see it with any frequency. It's nice to watch occasionally, but I can't imagine how one can sit through the exact same thing every week.

on top of the fact that this complaint doesn't even make sense. house airs on mondays and fringe on tuesdays. i can't imagine why they would move fringe forcibly to another day just to preempt house and I'm pretty sure they haven't.

anyway, I think you people who are physically angered by a show you don't like need to take a step back and do some deep breathing or something. good god.

I like fringe. it's mindless enough to be a sort of junk fiction but "smart" enough to remain slightly intriguing and keep my attention. I'll keep watching. hell, I'll keep watching just to make all the angry people in here pop an aneurysm since the thought of anyone actually enjoying this show is clearly bad for their blood pressure.

House used to play on Tuesdays, but this season they moved it to Monday so that Fox would have House and 24 back-to-back and a near guaranteed Monday night lockdown.

One possibility on your Cryptography analysis... It might not be a direct letter cypher. (i.e. X NUmber = A, Y Number = B) and could very well be tied to a common Phrase in the show as the start point/Key of the Cypher.

For example use the key phrase of:

All Good Boys Do Fine

and then the number pattern of say:

0 6 7 11 6 20 1 7

You get a phrase which is completely different than standard direct comparison cyphers without the use of a key phrase. I would agree with the 72 different "glyphs" being a wrap on the cypher; however, it is also very possible that they may be including spaces, commas, and the like as part of the cypher as well. The problem is figuring out the order of the "glyphs" in the numerical scheme of things.

I love this show. The science is completely stupid, I laughed at the "follow the pigeons to find the magnetic guy" bit, that was just hilarious. Walter & Son make the show totally worth it. I'm not into the puzzle aspect, at least not solving myself, but I always find it interesting when people figure these things out.

Since I'm on the internet, I'm required to say the following:

If you don't agree with me, you're a moron/douche bag or other derogatory statement indicating your inferiority that you prefer. I'm all about giving people choices.